REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND GAPS IN INDIA’S URBAN REDEVELOPMENT LAWS

redevelopment, apartment ownership, consent, interim rent,
deemed conveyance, RERA, cooperative society, redevelopment of apartments, redevelpment difficulties, legal framework for redevelopment, RERA in redevelopment, step by step procedure for redevelopment, flow of operations for redevelopment.

1. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8372
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND GAPS IN INDIA’S
URBAN REDEVELOPMENT LAWS
Samirsinh P. Parmar, Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Dharmasingh
Desai University, Nadiad, Gujarat, India.
Dr. Swati H Chauhan, Associate Prof., Gujarat Homeopathic Medical College, Savli,
Vadodara
(ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0196-2570)

ABSTRACT
Urban apartment redevelopment in India faces legal and regulatory
fragmentation. Aging buildings and urban development goals have spurred
redevelopment, but overlapping central and state laws create persistent gaps.
Key issues include unclear owner consent thresholds, unresolved occupancy
of stalled projects, and absence of statutory norms for interim rent or
rehabilitation until reconstruction.
Courts have begun clarifying these issues. The court also affirmed that
resolutions adopted by a housing society’s general body bind all members
and cannot be invalidated by unilateral objections. However, laws still vary
by state: many statutes lack explicit provisions for compensation during
redevelopment, relying on private agreements. This study synthesizes RERA
(2016), state apartment acts, cooperative society and municipal rules, and
key case law to map these deficiencies. The analysis underscores the need
for coordinated reform—such as uniform consent thresholds, mandatory
interim compensation, escrow-backed conveyance, and fast-track dispute
resolution—to streamline urban redevelopment
Keywords: redevelopment, apartment ownership, consent, interim rent,
deemed conveyance, RERA, cooperative society

2. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8373
Abbreviations
DCR : Development Control Regulations
MHADA : Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority
OC : Occupancy / Ownership Certificate
RERA : Real Estate Regulatory Authority
1. INTRODUCTION
Redevelopment of apartment buildings (including voluntary society redevelopment and
government-led rehabilitation) has become a major urban policy and legal challenge in India.
Older apartment stock, land scarcity, and safety concerns push many societies and landowners
to redevelop. At the same time, overlapping central and state laws, variations in state-level
apartment acts, and divergent judicial pronouncements make the legal landscape complex for
practitioners, owners, and local authorities. This paper maps the current legal framework and
synthesises best practices to resolve four recurrent problems that delay or derail redevelopment
projects. Central to the analysis are provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) and the patchwork of state Apartment Ownership /
Apartment Acts, alongside cooperative society laws and municipal rules.

Figure-1 Flow of operations for legal process of redevelopment.
1. Structural audit or need assessment.
2. General body meeting of owners/society.
3. Consent collection based on state law threshold.
4. Developer/contractor selection.
5. Signing of MoUor redevelopment agreement.
6. Municipal/development authority approval.
7. RERA registration (if applicable).
8. Vacating premises and arranging interim rent/transit housing.
9. Demolition and new construction.
10. Completion and occupancy certificate.
11. Formation of new cooperative society/owners’ association.
12. Handover of flats & common areas (deemed conveyance).
13. Final settlement and project closure.

3. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8374
Figure 1 illustrates the sequential legal and administrative framework governing the
redevelopment of residential buildings in India. The process begins with a structural audit or
need assessment (Step 1), which determines whether the building is unsafe, dilapidated, or
otherwise requires redevelopment. Following this, a general body meeting of the society or
association of owners (Step 2) is convened to discuss the redevelopment proposal. If approved,
consent is collected from members (Step 3), subject to the threshold percentage mandated
under state-specific laws (commonly 51%–70%). Once sufficient consent is secured, the
developer or contractor is selected (Step 4).
The next stage involves the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or
redevelopment agreement (Step 5) between the owners and the developer. Subsequently,
municipal or development authority approval (Step 6) is obtained, along with RERA
registration if the project falls under the scope of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development)
Act, 2016 (Step 7). Owners then vacate the premises and are provided interim rent or transit
accommodation (Step 8). Upon clearance, demolition of the old structure and commencement
of new construction occurs (Step 9). After completion, the developer secures an occupancy
certificate from the municipal authority (Step 10). Following this, a new cooperative society or
owners’ association is formed (Step 11), and the handover of flats and common areas (deemed
conveyance) is carried out (Step 12). Finally, the process culminates with project closure and
final settlement of all accounts and obligations (Step 13). The figure emphasizes that
redevelopment is not a single event but a structured legal and administrative process requiring
the alignment of owners, developers, municipal bodies, and regulatory authorities.
2. METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE
This is a doctrinal and policy synthesis based on (i) statutory texts (RERA and sample state
Apartment Acts), (ii) published guidance and commentary on redevelopment practice, and (iii)
select recent judicial pronouncements and policy changes in states with significant
redevelopment activity (e.g., Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Odisha). The paper focuses
on apartment redevelopment in urban India and does not address commercial redevelopment
or rural land-use conversion except where the laws overlap.

4. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8375

Figure- 2 Detailed process of re-development of residential societies.
3. LEGAL FRAMEWORK: CENTRAL AND STATE LAYERS
3.1. Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA)
RERA creates institutional mechanisms (state RERAs) to regulate promoters and projects,
improve transparency, and protect allottees’ rights. While RERA primarily governs promoters
and new project registrations, its consumer-protection and dispute-resolution provisions
indirectly affect redevelopment projects—especially where a promoter is involved or new
allotments are promised as part of redevelopment.
3.2. State Apartment Ownership Acts and Model Provisions
Apartment ownership, handover of common areas, and formation of owners’ associations are
governed by state-level Apartment Ownership / Apartment Acts (or, in their absence, by the
Societies Registration Act or Cooperative Societies Acts). States differ: Maharashtra, Delhi,
Tamil Nadu and recently Odisha have modernised their statutes to clarify formation of
associations, handover, and redevelopment clauses. (Table-1) These Acts typically define the
process of executing a “declaration” or “deed of apartments”, the constitution of associations,
and a framework for redevelopment clauses (e.g., Maharashtra’s Act contains explicit
redevelopment-related provisions).

5. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8376
Table 1 – Comparison of State Apartment Ownership Acts
State Consent
Threshold for
Redevelopment
(%)
Interim Rent
Provision in Law
Time-limit for
Handover of
Common
Areas /
Deemed
Conveyance
Relevant Act
& Year
Maharashtra 75% (Co-op
societies) / 51%
(some layouts
under recent
amendment)
Not explicit in
Act, but
mandatory under
Model
Redevelopment
Agreement
Within 4
months of
society
registration
(deemed
conveyance)
Maharashtra
Apartment
Ownership Act,
1970;
Maharashtra
Co-operative
Societies Act,
1960
Gujarat 75% (based on
Gujarat Co-op
Societies Rules)
No explicit
provision in
Apartment Act;
rent via
redevelopment
agreement
Within 3
months after
completion
certificate
Gujarat
Ownership
Flats Act, 1973
Delhi Unanimous consent
traditionally, but
evolving toward
60–75% in recent
redevelopment
policies
No statutory
provision;
decided
contractually
Within 3
months of
forming
association
Delhi
Apartment
Ownership Act,
1986
Tamil Nadu 2/3 majority
consent
No explicit
provision; interim
rent via private
contract
120 days after
OC
Tamil Nadu
Apartment
Ownership Act,
2022
Karnataka 2/3 majority
consent
Not explicit;
model agreements
recommend
Within 4
months of
association
registration
Karnataka
Apartment
Ownership Act,
1972
Odisha 51% consent
(recent reform for
faster
redevelopment)
No explicit;
interim rent/rehab
allowance in
agreement
Within 90 days
after project
completion
Odisha
Apartment
Ownership Act,
2023
3.3. Cooperative Societies and Municipal/Development Control Rules
Where the building is owned and managed as a cooperative housing society, the state
cooperative society’s law and local Development Control Regulations (DCR)/municipal by-

6. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8377
laws also apply. Municipal permissions (building plan approvals, demolition/occupancy
clearances) remain mandatory for redevelopment. Where land is owned by a public agency
(e.g., MHADA), the authority’s own rules and land allotment terms may control redevelopment
paths. Recent high-profile cases show municipal/authority prerogatives can be decisive for
large public-land redevelopment.
4. KEY ISSUES AND LEGAL RESPONSES
4.1. Consent: Must every owner agree? How much is enough?
Problem: Redevelopment deals often stall because some owners dissent. Practitioners ask
whether unanimous consent is required for redevelopment, or whether a specified
supermajority of owners can bind the remainder.
Law & Practice: There is no single pan-India rule; consent thresholds depend on (a) the
instrument under which the apartments are constituted (deed/declaration), (b) the state statute
applicable to the apartment complex or society, and (c) judicial precedents. Several
states/municipalities now permit redevelopment on the basis of a qualified majority rather than
unanimity. Courts and amended state laws have upheld redevelopment with 51%–75% member
consent depending on local statute and circumstances. Recent judicial orders in Gujarat and
Maharashtra have upheld redevelopment decisions taken with prescribed majorities (e.g., 75%
under certain state provisions and 51% in others where state law was amended). The practical
consequence: in many urban jurisdictions, unanimous consent is no longer an absolute
requirement; instead, statutory majorities or cooperative bye-laws control.
Policy implication: Clear state-wide thresholds (e.g., 2/3rds or 75% depending on whether the
society owns land outright or tenure is complex) combined with well-drafted dissent remedies
(buyout formulas, guaranteed rehabilitation) reduce litigation risk.
4.2. “Stuck” or Undeveloped / Stalled Projects — Residents Left in the Lurch
Problem interpretation: “Stack in undeveloped apartments” is taken here to mean
occupants/allottees who are living in or legally tied to partially developed, unsafe, or stalled
projects (or societies that delay redevelopment). They face health and safety risks and legal
uncertainty. Table-2 classifies the different issues regarding redevelopment of the housing
projects and the concern authorities involved into it.

7. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8378
Legal protections & remedies:
• RERA provides an adjudicatory route for homebuyers against promoters for delay and
failures in handover; state RERA authorities can order refunds/compensation where a
promoter is at fault.
• For society-led redevelopment, municipal authorities may require structural audits and
may refuse permissions for continued occupation of unsafe blocks; judicial intervention
often orders interim safety measures or evacuation.
• Where government-owned land is redeveloped (e.g., MHADA projects), courts have
sometimes allowed redevelopment without a low-consent hurdle if the authority’s
statutory rights and rehabilitation plans are robust—illustrating that public-interest
redevelopment can proceed despite some resident objections, provided statutory
safeguards for rehabilitation are in place.
Recommendation: statutory minimum standards for “temporary habitability,” mandatory
structural audits before allowing continued occupation during redevelopment negotiations, and
a clear, time-bound process for evacuation and re-housing with enforceable interim
entitlements.
Table 2 – Remedies for Stalled or Undeveloped Projects
Problem Type Applicable Provision /
Law
Authority
Involved
Example Case
Delay in
completion of
redevelopment by a
private developer
Real Estate
(Regulation and
Development) Act,
2016 – Sections 18 &
19 (refund, interest,
compensation)
State RERA
Authority
XYZ Co-op Housing
Society v. ABC
Developers –
MahaRERA ordered
refund with interest for
3-year delay
Unsafe existing
building but
redevelopment
stalled
Municipal
Development Control
Regulations; State
Municipal Acts –
structural audit &
eviction powers
Municipal
Corporation /
Urban Local
Body
Sunil Kumar v.
Municipal Corporation
of Greater Mumbai – HC
upheld eviction notice
for unsafe building
pending redevelopment

8. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8379
Developer
abandoned project
mid-way
RERA Section 8 –
Authority to complete
work or transfer to
another developer
State RERA
Authority
Gujarat RERA Suo Moto
Order (2022) – Project
reassigned to new
promoter
Non-payment of
agreed interim rent
to displaced owners
Redevelopment
Agreement / MoU;
Specific Relief Act,
1963
Civil Court /
RERA (if
registered
project)
Shivaji CHS v. M/s PQR
Constructions – Civil
Court directed payment
of arrears with penalty
Failure to handover
flats after
construction
completion
RERA Section 19(10),
State Apartment
Ownership Acts
State RERA
Authority /
Consumer
Forum
Anil Mehta v. XYZ Realty
– Delhi RERA imposed
penalty and ordered
immediate possession
handover
Dispute between
minority dissenters
and majority
approving
redevelopment
State Co-operative
Societies Act / State
Apartment Act
provisions
Registrar of
Co-operative
Societies /
Civil Court
Goregaon
Redevelopment Dispute
(2025) – SC upheld
MHADA-approved
redevelopment despite
minority opposition
Note: Name / Titles of the parties are not disclosed to maintain privacy of the case.
4.3. Remuneration / Interim Rent / Rehabilitation Allowances until New Flats are Allotted
Problem: Owners who vacate for redevelopment (or those displaced by authority action) need
fair interim compensation, temporary accommodation, or rent until the allotment of
replacement flats is complete.
Current approach and gaps: There is no uniform national “interim rent” regime for voluntary
private redevelopment. Typical contractual practice (in redevelopment MoUs) includes
developer obligations to provide either: (a) alternate accommodation (transit tenements), (b)
rent allowance for the period of temporary displacement, or (c) monetary compensation/market
buyout. For public land redevelopments, rehabilitation packages are often prescribed in project
documents. Courts regularly enforce contractual commitments and have ordered interim
payments in cases where occupation was taken by agencies. However, because these are
contractual or administrative remedies, enforcement and fairness vary.
Best-practice model clause (recommended): a statutory or model contractual provision that
requires: (i) binding interim rent at a transparent formula (e.g., indexed to local minimum rent
levels or agreed CPI-based formula), (ii) developer-funded transit accommodation with

9. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8380
minimum quality standards, (iii) an escrow mechanism or bank guarantee to secure these
payments until handover, and (iv) RERA/competent authority oversight for timely compliance.
4.4. Ownership of New Facilities until Formation of New Cooperative Society / Owners’
Association (Deemed Conveyance)
Problem: After redevelopment, the newly constructed common areas and completed units
must legally vest in the owners’ association. Delays in forming/registration the association can
leave owners without legal control of common facilities, services, or maintenance; sometimes
developers retain control informally.
Statutory situation: State Apartment Acts and model bye-laws typically require the developer
to execute and register a “declaration” or transfer common areas to the association/owners
within a time-bound period after completion. Where a society exists, cooperative law often
prescribes “deemed conveyance” or statutory transfer procedures. Some state statutes require
the promoter to transfer ownership of common areas within a fixed period (e.g., within months
after forming the association) and impose penalties for failure to transfer. In practice,
enforcement varies and litigation is common when developers delay handover.
Protective measures: A model approach: condition municipal/occupancy certificates on proof
of either (a) registration of the owners’ association or (b) deposit of title instruments and an
escrow of maintenance fund that will be released only after legal handover; statutory timelines
and penalty triggers (including criminal sanctions for fraudulent retention) help enforce
transfer.
5. CASE LAW AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS (SELECT EXAMPLES)
• State-case examples demonstrate that courts give weight to the statutory consent
threshold; in Gujarat and Maharashtra, high courts have upheld redevelopment
decisions taken on prescribed majority consent (e.g., 75% or statutory thresholds)
against minority obstruction.
• On large public-land redevelopments, the Supreme Court has recently (2025) allowed
MHADA’s redevelopment via private bidding to proceed while declining to impose a
fixed democratic-consent requirement where the authority retains statutory landowner

10. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8381
rights and provides rehabilitation commitments—indicative of the courts balancing
landowner authority, public interest, and resident rights.
6. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CLEARER, FAIRER REDEVELOPMENT
PROCESSES
1. Uniform minimum consent thresholds with dissent safeguards. States should adopt
clear thresholds (e.g., 66% or 75% depending on whether the society holds freehold
title; lower thresholds where public-interest statutory owners hold title), and statutory
buyout formulas for dissenters to avoid holdout problems.
2. Mandatory interim-rent / rehabilitation standards. Central model rules (or RERA
guidelines) should prescribe minimum interim rent/rehabilitation obligations, quality
standards for transit housing, and an escrow/guarantee requirement to secure payments.
3. Time-bound transfer / deemed-conveyance rules. Statutes should require developers
to transfer ownership of common facilities within a fixed period after completion or
registration of the association. Municipalities should withhold occupancy certification
until handover or escrow is complete.
4. Strengthened RERA & municipal coordination. Where promoters participate in
redevelopment, RERA should explicitly handle redevelopment-related disclosures
(phasing, interim arrangements, consent evidence) and coordinate with municipal
authorities to streamline permissions while protecting residents.
5. Standard MoU templates and mandatory disclosures. States or RERAs should
publish standard MoU/developer-society agreement templates that specify interim rent,
allotment timelines, parking rights, and maintenance arrangements to reduce disputes
over contract terms.
6. Fast-track dispute resolution for interim matters. Establish (under RERA or state
law) expedited procedures to resolve interim disputes—payment of interim rent, transit
accommodation quality, and handover of common areas—so residents are not left
waiting for long litigation.

11. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8382
7. MODEL LEGAL CLAUSE EXAMPLES
• Consent clause: “Redevelopment may be undertaken with consent of 75 % of total
owners by share or by number (specify). Dissenting owners shall be offered a buyout
at a prescribed formula or equivalent replacement unit.”
• Interim rent clause: “Developer shall pay interim rent @ [formula] monthly until
delivery of replacement unit or provide transit accommodation meeting minimum
standards; funds secured in escrow.”
Formula for Interim Rent
IR= (CA×RR) +MA
Nomenclature
• IR = Interim Rent (₹/month) payable to the member
• CA = Carpet Area of the member’s existing unit (sq. ft. or sq. m.)
• RR = Prevailing Rental Rate per unit area in the locality (₹/sq. ft. or ₹/sq. m. per month)
• MA = Maintenance Allowance (₹/month) to cover utilities, society charges, etc.
Clause Draft
Interim Rent Clause: “The Developer shall pay Interim Rent calculated as
IR=(CA×RR)+MA, where CA is the carpet area of the existing unit, RR is the prevailing
market rental rate per unit area in the locality as determined by a government-certified valuer
or registered real estate authority, and MA is a fixed monthly maintenance allowance. This
payment shall continue until the delivery of the replacement unit or, alternatively, the
Developer shall provide transit accommodation meeting prescribed minimum standards. All
interim rent funds shall be secured in an escrow account.”
• Handover clause: “Developer to execute conveyance of common areas to registered
association within 120 days of final OC; OC will be withheld until conveyance or
deposit of title deeds in government-controlled escrow.”

12. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8383
Table 3– Summary of Key Judicial Pronouncements on Redevelopment in India
Case Name Court Year Issue Ruling / Outcome
Girnar Traders v.
State of
Maharashtra
Supreme
Court of
India
2011 Challenge to land
acquisition for
redevelopment
under Maharashtra
laws
Upheld State’s power to
acquire land for public
redevelopment projects;
reinforced “public
purpose” principle
Kailash Nath
Associates v. DDA
Supreme
Court of
India
2015 Forfeiture of earnest
money in delayed
project allotment
Held that forfeiture
without proof of actual
loss is arbitrary;
reinforced need for
fairness in contractual
dealings
Bombay Dyeing &
Mfg. Co. Ltd. v.
Bombay
Environmental
Action Group
Supreme
Court of
India
2006 Redevelopment of
mill lands in
Mumbai
Allowed redevelopment
subject to compliance
with development control
regulations; balanced
development with
environmental concerns
Ram Chandra
Chhatpar v. State of
Maharashtra
Bombay
High
Court
2018 Minority owners
opposing society-
approved
redevelopment
Ruled that 75% consent
under Maharashtra Co-
operative Societies Act is
binding; dissenters
cannot stall project
unreasonably
DLF Universal Ltd.
v. RERA Haryana
Punjab &
Haryana
High
Court
2022 Developer challenge
to RERA penalty for
delay
Upheld RERA’s authority
to impose penalties and
order interest payments
to buyers
Sushil Kumar
Agarwal v.
Meenakshi Sadhu
Supreme
Court of
India
2019 Specific
performance of
redevelopment
agreement
Held that specific
performance can be
granted for development
agreements if terms are
clear and lawful
8. DISCUSSION
Redevelopment of old apartment complexes and housing societies has emerged as a key
strategy for addressing India’s urban housing shortage. However, despite growing demand and
increased regulatory oversight through RERA and state-level laws, redevelopment projects
continue to face recurring legal, procedural, and financial challenges.

13. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8384
Table 4– Common Issues in Redevelopment & Recommended Legal Provisions
Issue Current Legal Gap Recommended Provision / Clause
Delays in project
completion
Most State Acts rely on
contractual timelines;
weak enforcement
mechanisms
Mandatory inclusion of penalty clause
for delay in State Apartment
Ownership Acts; automatic RERA
intervention after 6 months of delay
Non-payment or
irregular payment of
interim rent
No statutory guarantee in
many states; depends
solely on redevelopment
agreement
Statutory requirement for escrow
account for interim rent with monthly
disbursal monitored by RERA
Lack of transparency
in developer selection
No uniform procedure;
societies often bypass
tendering
Mandatory open tender process with at
least 3 bids for society-led
redevelopment
Disputes due to
minority dissenters
Some states still require
near-unanimous consent;
delays projects
Uniform 66% consent threshold
nationally, with protective
compensation clause for dissenters
Delay in formation of
new co -operative
society or association
No strict timeline for
registration post-
completion
Mandatory registration of new
society/association within 90 days of
occupancy certificate
Ambiguity in
ownership of
additional constructed
area (FSI benefits)
Often silent in law; leads
to disputes
Explicit clause in State Acts defining
proportionate ownership of extra FSI
benefits between developer and
existing owners
Abandonment of
project by developer
RERA allows
reassignment but process
can be slow
Fast-track reassignment procedure
with interim project custodian
appointed by RERA
These issues underscore the need for statutory clarity (table-4), strict enforcement, and
financial safeguards in the redevelopment process. Uniform provisions across states—
anchored in RERA oversight—can minimize disputes, reduce project delays, and restore public
confidence in redevelopment as a viable model for urban renewal.
Urban redevelopment in India has historically been plagued by delays, legal disputes, and a
lack of uniform regulatory oversight. The challenges were particularly acute in the context of
apartment and housing society redevelopment, where multiple stakeholders—apartment
owners, cooperative societies, municipal bodies, and developers—interacted within a
fragmented legal framework.
Before the introduction of structured regulations like the Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) and subsequent state-specific amendments, redevelopment

14. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8385
often suffered from:
i. Lack of Accountability in Timelines and Delivery
a. Developers frequently failed to complete projects on schedule, leaving residents
displaced for extended periods without adequate rent compensation.
b. There was no effective statutory enforcement mechanism to ensure timely
completion, and disputes often languished in civil courts.
ii. Consent Deadlocks
a. Many state apartment ownership and cooperative society laws required near-
unanimous consent for redevelopment.
b. This gave disproportionate veto power to a small minority, stalling projects
beneficial to the majority and contributing to urban decay.
iii. Opaque Financial Practices
a. Without statutory escrow mechanisms, interim rent and construction funds were
often mismanaged.
b. Owners faced uncertainty about whether developers had the financial capacity to
deliver on promises.
iv. Fragmented Legal Framework
a. Different states followed different consent thresholds, building norms, and dispute
resolution mechanisms, creating confusion for developers and owners alike.
b. Cross-state developers struggled with varying regulatory requirements.
v. Urban Infrastructure Pressures
a. Rapid urbanization and limited land availability made redevelopment a crucial tool
for increasing housing stock in prime city areas.

15. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8386
b. Without proper regulation, redevelopment risked producing unsafe, non-compliant,
or environmentally unsustainable structures.
vi. Weak Protection for Displaced Residents
a. Prior to reforms, many displaced owners had no guaranteed interim housing or
rent payments.
b. This eroded trust in redevelopment and led to prolonged resistance from
residents.
Table 5 – Landmark Policy Changes Post-RERA (2016–2025)
Year Policy /
Amendment
Jurisdiction Key Change Impact on
Redevelopment
2016 Real Estate
(Regulation and
Development) Act,
2016 (RERA)
National Mandatory
registration of all
redevelopment
projects over 500 sq.
m; timelines
enforceable
Improved project
accountability,
provided
buyer/owner
protection
2018 Maharashtra Co-
operative Societies
(Amendment)
Rules, 2018
Maharashtra Reduced consent
threshold for society
redevelopment from
100% to 75%
Facilitated faster
decision-making and
project initiation
2019 Model Tenancy Act
Draft
National Defined rights of
landlords and tenants,
including temporary
rehousing during
redevelopment
Strengthened interim
rent and relocation
protections
2020 Delhi Development
Control Regulations
Amendment
Delhi Introduced clear FSI
norms and incentives
for in-situ
redevelopment
Increased viability of
redevelopment in
dense urban areas
2021 Gujarat Ownership
Flats (Amendment)
Act
Gujarat Mandatory RERA
compliance for all
redevelopment
projects
Brought
transparency and
dispute resolution
under RERA scope
2022 Tamil Nadu
Apartment
Ownership Act,
2022
Tamil Nadu Introduced consent
threshold of 2/3 and
mandated builder
selection process
Improved
governance and
uniformity in
redevelopment
2023 Odisha Apartment
Ownership Act,
2023
Odisha Allowed 51% consent
for redevelopment and
Accelerated project
initiation in smaller
cities

16. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8387
introduced fast-track
approvals
2024 RERA (National) –
Proposed Digital
Compliance
Platform
National Enabled real-time
tracking of project
progress, funds, and
grievances
Enhanced
monitoring and
reduced delays
2025 Draft National
Urban
Redevelopment
Policy
National Proposes uniform
consent thresholds,
escrow for interim
rent, and FSI sharing
formula
Aims to harmonize
redevelopment laws
across states
Policy Response
The landmark policy changes from 2016 to 2025 aimed to address these systemic weaknesses
by:
• Introducing uniform timelines, escrow accounts, and RERA-based monitoring to
ensure project completion and protect financial flows.
• Lowering consent thresholds to facilitate faster decision-making while balancing
minority rights through compensation safeguards.
• Mandating transparent developer selection processes to prevent arbitrary or corrupt
agreements.
• Harmonizing FSI norms and redevelopment incentives to improve viability in
congested urban cores.
• Creating digital compliance platforms for real-time monitoring, reducing reliance on
slow manual inspections.
These reforms were not merely administrative upgrades—they were structural interventions
aimed at restoring trust, efficiency, and fairness in the redevelopment ecosystem. By bridging
legal gaps and aligning stakeholder incentives, the policies laid the foundation for sustainable
urban renewal in India’s rapidly growing cities.
8. CONCLUSION
Redevelopment and development of apartments in India require a coordinated statutory and

17. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8388
administrative framework to balance majority will, minority protection, safety, and urban
redevelopment goals. The present legal landscape—RERA at the centre, supplemented by state
Apartment Acts and cooperative laws—offers many tools but is fragmented in practice. Clearer
statutory consent thresholds, mandatory interim compensation standards, escrow-backed
handover rules, and fast-track dispute mechanisms will reduce litigation and protect vulnerable
occupants. Implementing model contractual clauses state-wide, together with RERA guidance
and municipal coordination, will make redevelopment safer, fairer, and faster.

18. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8389
REFERENCES
1. The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (Bare Act / state RERA
material).
2. The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 (text & amended provisions relating
to redevelopment).
3. Delhi Apartment Ownership Act, 1986 (model bye-laws and declarations).
4. Tamil Nadu Apartment Ownership Act, 2022 (provisions on formation of owners’
association and redevelopment-related rules).
5. Case law and reporting on redevelopment consent thresholds and judgments upholding
statutory majority-based redevelopment decisions (e.g., Sun valley case / Gujarat High
Court citations), Ahmedabad Mirror.
6. Parmar S P, Chauhan S H. Legal and Ethical Guidelines in CCTV Surveillance:
Addressing Key Issues in Educational Institutions. Int. Jour. Law Hum Rights Const.
Stud. 2024; 6(2): 14-28.
7. Recent Mumbai / MHADA redevelopment reporting and Supreme Court clearance for
Goregaon redevelopment (2025) illustrating authority prerogatives and rehabilitation
obligations.
8. Practical guidance and redevelopment process notes from legal and real-estate practice
sources (sample MoUs, escrow suggestions).

19. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8390
Table-I Key Takeaways from the Study
Theme Key Insights Future Research Directions
Legal Framework Section 79A of the Maharashtra
Cooperative Societies Act, 1960,
and DCR 2034 provide the
regulatory base for CHS
redevelopment. However,
inconsistent interpretations cause
disputes and delays.
Study comparative legal
frameworks across Indian
states; analyze impact of RERA
integration with
redevelopment.
Financial
Challenges
High construction & land costs,
temporary housing expenses, and
limited access to loans hinder
redevelopment, especially for
smaller societies.
Explore innovative financing
models (PPP, cooperative
financing, and crowdfunding)
for housing redevelopment.
Stakeholder
Coordination
Lack of collaboration among
residents, developers, PMC, and
government official’s leads to
conflicts and project delays.
Develop stakeholder
engagement frameworks;
evaluate role of digital
platforms for communication.
Transparency &
Governance
Absence of clear guidelines and
opaque decision-making erodes
trust. Need for robust monitoring
committees and open digital
platforms.
Assess effectiveness of
technology-driven governance
(block chain, online portals) in
enhancing transparency.
Judicial Oversight Courts emphasize transparency,
documentation, and cooperation in
redevelopment cases.
Examine role of judiciary in
shaping urban redevelopment
policies; compile case-law
analysis.
Regulatory
Approvals
Lengthy bureaucratic processes and
unclear approval mechanisms
increase costs and delay projects.
Recommend single-window
clearance systems and measure
impact on project timelines.
Social Impact Resident displacement during
construction and unequal benefit-
sharing are major concerns.
Investigate socio-economic
effects of redevelopment on
vulnerable groups (elderly,
tenants, low-income families).
Environmental &
Safety Concerns
Guidelines stress environmental
compliance, but implementation
remains weak.
Explore integration of green
building codes, energy
efficiency, and sustainable
redevelopment models.

20. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume VII Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Page: 8391
Self-
Redevelopment
Government has encouraged self-
redevelopment (2019 notification)
to reduce dependence on
developers.
Study success/failure cases of
self-redevelopment and its
scalability across other metro
cities.
Policy
Recommendations
Need for legal simplification,
financial support, capacity building,
monitoring, and technology
adoption.
Comparative policy analysis
with global practices
(Singapore, Hong Kong,
Japan) for urban
redevelopment.